Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 Next »
Reply To Thread

Taliban eyes PakistanFollow

#77 May 07 2009 at 1:08 PM Rating: Good
****
4,158 posts
Varus = Utter god-fearing moron.

____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#78 May 07 2009 at 1:34 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
hangtennow wrote:
Debo,

Quote:
This seems to be the best way to deal with your discussions, since everything you say is factually wrong.


What's false is you people not giving W his due for taking the fight to the muslims. WTF has any democrat president done in the last 30yrs to keep this country safe?

Muslims? Any muslims? I guess it doesn't matter how closely associated (or not) they were to the actual event, as long as they face Mecca when kneeling.

You keep missing the point (which I guess is intentional, since it's the only way you can keep your argument going).
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#79REDACTED, Posted: May 07 2009 at 1:40 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,
#80REDACTED, Posted: May 07 2009 at 1:41 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Paula,
#81 May 07 2009 at 1:42 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

That doesn't invalidate what Clinton said. He was already suspected of one terrorist act. So don't pretend that Clinton did anything to stop Bin Laden because he sent a memo.


It is strange, Clinton had clear psychic powers in every other regard, and the ability to make decisions based on what would happen two years hence. I can only assume that he was probably in the middle of being fellated when the vision came to him, and mistook the jet hitting the building and the resultant explosion for his own ******.

Happens.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#82 May 07 2009 at 1:46 PM Rating: Decent
hangtennow wrote:
What's the point of including cites/sources you people never do.


Smiley: lol Ho god! Stop, you're making my ribs hurt.
#83 May 07 2009 at 2:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
hangtennow wrote:
What's the point of including cites/sources you people never do.
Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#84REDACTED, Posted: May 07 2009 at 6:50 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Slick Willy sends memo's and you actually think that's doing something. lmao
#85 May 07 2009 at 9:25 PM Rating: Good
Slick Willy also sent missiles, in 1998.

Missed Bin Laden, though.

C I T E!
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#86 May 08 2009 at 4:45 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,229 posts
hangtennow wrote:
Locked,

Quote:
During a February 2002 speech, Clinton explained that he turned down an offer from Sudan for bin Laden's extradition to the U.S., saying, "At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him."

But that wasn't exactly true. By 1996, the 9/11 mastermind had already been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by prosecutors in New York.

9/11 Commissioner former Sen. Bob Kerrey said that Clinton told the Commission during his private interview that reports of his comments to the LIA were based on "a misquote."


During his interview with the 9/11 Commission, Clinton was accompanied by longtime aide and former White House counsel Bruce Lindsey, along with former national security advisor Sandy Berger, who insisted in sworn testimony before Congress in Sept. 2002 that there was never any offer from Sudanese officials to turn over bin Laden to the U.S.

But other evidence suggests the Clinton administration did not take advantage of offers to get bin Laden -- and that the Monica Lewinsky scandal was exploding during this time period.

At least two offers from the government of Sudan to arrest Osama bin Laden and turn him over to the U.S. were rebuffed by the Clinton administration in February and March of 1996, a period of time when the former president's attention was distracted by his intensifying relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

One of the offers took place during a secret meeting in Washington, the same day Clinton was meeting with Lewinsky in the White House just miles away.

On Feb. 6, 1996, then-U.S. Ambassador to the Sudan Tim Carney met with Sudanese Foreign Minister Ali Osman Mohammed Taha at Taha's home in the capital city of Khartoum. The meeting took place just a half mile from bin Laden's residence at the time, according to Richard Miniter's book "Losing bin Laden."

During the meeting, Carney reminded the Sudanese official that Washington was increasingly nervous about the presence of bin Laden in Sudan, reports Miniter.

Foreign Minister Taha countered by saying that Sudan was very concerned about its poor relationship with the U.S.

Then came the bombshell offer:

"If you want bin Laden, we will give you bin Laden," Foreign Minister Taha told Ambassador Carney.

Still, with the extraordinarily fortuitous offer on the table, back in Washington President Clinton had other things on his mind.

A timeline of events chronicled in the Starr Report shows that during the period of late January through March 1996, Mr. Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky was then at its most intense.

On Feb. 4, 1996, for instance - two days before Ambassador Carney's key meeting with the Sudanese Foreign Minister, the president was focused not on Osama bin Laden, but instead on the 23-year-old White House intern.

Their rendezvous that day included a sexual encounter followed by a leisurely chat between Clinton and Lewinsky, as the two "sat and talked [afterward] for about 45 minutes," according to the Starr Report.

Later in the afternoon that same day, as Sudanese officials weighed their decision to offer bin Laden to the U.S., Clinton found time to call Lewinsky "[to say] he had enjoyed their time together." If there were any calls from Clinton to the State Department or Khartoum that day, the records have yet to surface in published reports.



Liberals can't lie their way out of this one. Clinton turned down Bin Laden.




Your testimonies lack credence. As it says "By 1996, the 9/11 mastermind had already been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by prosecutors in New York.", being named and having enough evidence to present a case are two different things.

If the US had hard evidence against Bin Laden back then, it would have started extradition proceedings itself.

The article proves nothing.
#87REDACTED, Posted: May 08 2009 at 5:38 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) groggy,
#88 May 08 2009 at 5:52 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,229 posts
hangtennow wrote:
groggy,

Quote:
"By 1996, the 9/11 mastermind had already been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by prosecutors in New York.", being named and having enough evidence to present a case are two different things.


Being named should have been enough of a reason to detain, especially for what he was accused of.


Well unless your laws differ from ours, and bear in mind this is before The Patriot Act (or the UK Terrorism Act), you're wrong. The police can name as many people as they wish as suspects in a case, but you can only extradite or charge on evidence. That is why we have extradition proceedings, otherwise you'd just ask.
#89 May 08 2009 at 8:50 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,453 posts
hangtennow wrote:
Ryne,
We all know W did everything he could to deal with radical MUSLIM terrorists.


The anti-terrorism task force that Bush announced on May 8, 2001, headed by **** Cheney NEVER EVER MET. Bush claimed that he would personally chair a meeting of the National Security Council to review the efforts of that task force. He never chaired any such meeting either.

Yeah, Bushie did a terrific job!

Edited, May 8th 2009 12:52pm by Deathwysh
1 2 3 4 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 321 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (321)